System and method for computational planningin a data-dependent constraint management system

ABSTRACT

A method of determining a conditional computational plan for a data dependent constraint network represented by a bipartite graph containing input variable nodes, output variable nodes, and relation nodes, may include specifying, using a variable node specifier, at least one output variable node for which a plan is desired. The method may further include determining, using a plan determiner, a plan from the input variable nodes to the output variable node using a backward chaining search of the bipartite graph.

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

The present application is related to pending U.S. application Ser. No.13/422,335 filed on Mar. 16, 2012, and entitled SYSTEM AND METHOD FORRAPID MANAGEMENT OF LOGIC FORMULAS, the entire contents of which isexpressly incorporated by reference herein.

FIELD

The present disclosure relates generally to constraint managementsystems and, more particularly, to computational planning in adata-dependent constraint network.

BACKGROUND

The conceptual design of a vehicle such as an aircraft or a space launchvehicle typically involves a set of design tradeoff studies or tradestudies wherein numerous system configurations and criteria may beconsidered. In order to arrive at an optimal design, it is desirable toevaluate a wide variety of candidate design concepts from the standpointof vehicle performance, cost, reliability, and a variety of otherfactors across multiple disciplines. The evaluation of candidate designconcepts may be implemented in a computational procedure such as in aconstraint management system or a constraint network.

A constraint network may be represented as a bipartite graph containingvariable nodes and relation nodes interconnected by arcs. Each variablenode represents a variable in the constraint network. Each relation noderepresents an equality constraint (e.g., an equation). An arc mayconnect a variable node to a relation node if and only if the variableis included in the equality constraint of the relation node. The arcs inthe bipartite graph may be directed, with one outgoing arc from eachequality constraint pointing to the variable that the equalityconstraint is meant to compute given the values of other variables thatare connected to the equality constraint.

In the classical implementation of a constraint network for trade studyapplications, the set of equations is static such that every equation issatisfied all the time. In addition, alternative computational methodsmay be embedded in selected equations such as in the followingrepresentation for determining the aerodynamic drag of an aircraft:

dragPlane=If(CanardIsPresent,dragBody_CanardAttached(FuselageSize)+dragCanard(CanardSize),dragBody_NoCanard(FuselageSize))

Unfortunately, embedding computational methods in equations such as inthe above-noted representation can be cumbersome for a modeler ofcomplex systems involving many different configurations. Furthermore,embedding computational methods in equations may prevent the performanceof certain types of trade studies that require the reversal of thecomputational flow.

An alternative to embedding computational methods in equations is tomake the applicability of any given equation dependent upon thecomputational state determined by the constraint network. An importantproperty of constraint network modeling is the separation ofcomputational planning from the numerical solution of the constraintsets in the computational path. Computational planning may be defined asdetermining the ordered sequence of computational steps (i.e., thecomputational path through the constraint network from a specified inputvariable to a specified output variable, during the performance of agiven trade study. The separation of computational planning from thenumerical solution of the constraint sets is essential for providing asystem designer with relatively rapid feedback during a trade study.This, in turn, allows the system designer to explore a wide variety ofdesigns during a trade study.

In the case where the applicability of each equation is not static andis instead data-dependent, an effective technique for modeling such datadependence is to attach to each equation a propositional form, or awell-formed formula (WFF), which depends upon the data in the network,and which, if such WFF evaluates to true, means that the equation isapplicable in the given situation. In this regard, each WFF has a truthvalue defining a set of worlds where the WFF is true.

In the computational plan for a data-dependent constraint network, eachcomputational step is associated with a propositional form or a WFFwhich depends upon the data in the network and upon the results computedin the previous computational steps, and which, if the WFF evaluates totrue, means that the computational step is evaluated in the givensituation. The WFFs associated with each computational step may beobtained by applying different combinations of union, intersection, anddifference operators to the WFFs associated with the equations that needto be solved. When a WFF simplifies to a universally false WFF, thecomputational plan generation procedure can prune unneeded branches of aconstraint network and thereby produce compact and efficientcomputational plans.

Traditional methods for finding a computational plan in a constraintnetwork rely on a topological sort of the bipartite graph. Thecomputational complexity of such traditional methods may be linear withthe size of the graph. However, such traditional methods may not beapplicable when the topology of the graph varies dynamically with thevalues of the variables in the graph as in a data-dependent constraintnetwork. Furthermore, computational planning using traditional methodsmay involve the intermixing of planning and computation of theconstraint sets in the computational path. The intermixing of planningand computation reduces the flexibility and speed with which a designermay explore design spaces which limits the variety of designs that adesigner may explore.

As can be seen, there exists a need in the art for a system and methodfor computational planning in a data-dependent constraint network thatavoids the intermixing of planning and computation.

SUMMARY

The above-noted needs associated with conditional planning in adata-dependent constraint network are specifically addressed andalleviated by the present disclosure which provides a method ofdetermining a conditional computational plan for a data dependentconstraint network represented by a bipartite graph. The bipartite graphmay contain input variable nodes, output variable nodes, and relationnodes. The variable nodes and relation nodes may be interconnected byarcs. The method may include specifying at least one output variablenode for which a plan is desired, and determining a plan from the inputvariable nodes to the output variable nodes using a backward chainingsearch of the bipartite graph.

In a further embodiment, disclosed is a method of determining aconditional computational plan for a data dependent constraint networkrepresented by a bipartite graph containing input variable nodes, outputvariable nodes, and relation nodes wherein the variable nodes and therelations nodes may be interconnected by arcs. The method may includespecifying output variable nodes for which computational plans aredesired, specifying the input variable nodes from which computationalsteps of the plans are desired for computing values of the outputvariable nodes, specifying world sets in which the plans are desired,and determining the plans from the input variable nodes to the outputvariable nodes using a backward chaining search of the bipartite graph.

Also disclosed is a processor-based system for determining a conditionalcomputational plan for a data dependent constraint network representedby a bipartite graph containing input variable nodes, output variablenodes, and relation nodes. The variable nodes and the relation nodes maybe interconnected by arcs. The processor-based system may include avariable node selector configured to specify variable nodes as inputsrepresenting a starting point for the plan and variable nodes as outputsto be computed by the plan. The processor-based system may additionallyinclude a plan determiner configured to determine a plan from the inputvariable nodes to the output variable nodes using a backward chainingsearch of the bipartite graph.

The features, functions and advantages that have been discussed can beachieved independently in various embodiments of the present disclosureor may be combined in yet other embodiments, further details of whichcan be seen with reference to the following description and drawings.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

These and other features of the present disclosure will become moreapparent upon reference to the drawings wherein like numbers refer tolike parts throughout and wherein:

FIG. 1A is a diagrammatic illustration of a data-independent constraintnetwork having one relation node representing an equality constraintinterconnected by a plurality of arcs to five variable nodes eachrepresenting a variable;

FIG. 1B is a representation of the equality constraint represented bythe relation node of FIG. 1A;

FIG. 2A is a diagrammatic illustration of a data-dependent constraintnetwork having two equality constraints interconnected to the fivevariables;

FIG. 2B is a representation of the equality constraints represented bythe relation nodes of FIG. 2A;

FIG. 3 is a diagrammatic illustration of a data-dependent constraintnetwork having four equality constraints among seven variables includingthree state variables;

FIG. 4A is a diagrammatic illustration of the constraint network of FIG.3 wherein the highlighted arcs graphically illustrate steps (1), (2),and (3) of a computational plan from input variable node V1 to outputvariable node V3;

FIG. 4B is a listing of the values for the inputs, the outputs, and thesteps (1), (2), and (3) of the computational plan from input variablenode V1 to output variable node V3 of the constraint network of FIG. 4A;

FIG. 5 is a diagrammatic illustration of a constraint network having aregion with overlapping strong components and wherein each one of theequality constraints is preceded by a condition on a state variable;

FIG. 6A is a diagrammatic illustration of the constraint network of FIG.5 wherein the highlighted arcs graphically illustrate the steps of acomputational plan from input variable node bar to output variable nodev5;

FIG. 6B is a listing of the values for the input, the output, and thesteps of the computational plan from input variable node bar to outputvariable node v5 of the constraint network of FIG. 6A;

FIG. 7 is a table listing the various world sets involving the booleanstate variable Q and the categorical state variable S with values in{s1, s2, s3};

FIG. 8 is a diagrammatic illustration of a constraint network havingghost arcs illustrated in dashed font and wherein such ghost arcs may beadded between a relation node and a state variable if the state variableis contained in a world set that is associated with the search branchgetting to the relation node;

FIG. 9A is a flow diagram illustrating one or more operations that maybe included in a high-level method of determining a computational planfor a data-dependent constraint network;

FIG. 9B is a pseudo code listing of a routine for implementing themethod of determining the computational plan illustrated in the flowdiagram of FIG. 9A;

FIG. 10A is a flow diagram illustrating one or more operations that maybe included in a method of determining a world set in which a status ofthe variable nodes is determined;

FIG. 10B is a pseudo code listing of a routine for implementing themethod of determining the computational plan illustrated in the flow ofFIG. 10A;

FIG. 11A is a flow diagram illustrating one or more operations that maybe included in a method of updating the output queue for the plan;

FIG. 11B is a pseudo code listing of a routine for implementing themethod of updating the output queue as illustrated in the flow diagramof FIG. 11A;

FIG. 12A is a flow diagram illustrating one or more operations that maybe included in a method of adding variable nodes to an input queue ofthe plan;

FIG. 12B is a pseudo code listing of a routine for implementing themethod of adding variable nodes to the input queue illustrated in theflow diagram of FIG. 12A;

FIG. 13A is a flow diagram illustrating one or more operations that maybe included in a method of finding a plan for a variable node in a worldset;

FIG. 13B is a pseudo code listing of a routine for implementing themethod of finding a plan for a variable node as illustrated in the flowdiagram of FIG. 13A;

FIG. 14A is a flow diagram illustrating one or more operations that maybe included in a method of determining a plan for a strong component ina world set;

FIG. 14B is a pseudo code listing of a routine for implementing themethod of determining a plan for a strong component as illustrated inthe flow diagram of FIG. 14A;

FIG. 15A is a flow diagram illustrating one or more operations that maybe included in a method of determining a plan for a relation node in aworld set;

FIG. 15B is a pseudo code listing of a routine for implementing themethod of determining a plan for a relation node as illustrated in theflow diagram of FIG. 15A;

FIGS. 16A-16B represent a flow diagram illustrating one or moreoperations that may be included in a method of determining the plan foran input argument when a plan step comprises either an arc or a strongcomponent;

FIGS. 16c -16D represent a pseudo code listing of a routine forimplementing the method of determining the plan for an input argumentwhen a plan step comprises either an arc or a strong component asillustrated in the flow diagram of FIG. 16A;

FIG. 17A is a flow diagram illustrating one or more operations that maybe included in a method of modifying the plan structure by adding avariable and associated world set to the stub queue;

FIG. 17B is a pseudo code listing of a routine for implementing themethod of modifying the plan structure by adding a variable andassociated world set to the stub queue as illustrated in the flowdiagram of FIG. 17A;

FIG. 18A is a flow diagram illustrating one or more operations that maybe included in a method of modifying the plan structure by adding acomputational step and associated world set to the plan queue;

FIG. 18B is a pseudo code listing of a routine for implementing themethod of modifying the plan structure by adding a computational stepand associated world set to the plan queue as illustrated in the flowdiagram of FIG. 18A;

FIG. 19A is a flow diagram illustrating one or more operations that maybe included in a method of determining a union of all of the world setsthat are associated with an input step object of the plan;

FIG. 19B is a pseudo code listing of a routine for implementing themethod of determining a union of all of the world sets that areassociated with an input step object of the plan as illustrated in theflow diagram of FIG. 19A;

FIG. 20A is a flow diagram illustrating one or more operations that maybe included in a method of finalizing the plan by reversing an order ofplan steps of the plan;

FIG. 20B is a pseudo code listing of a routine for implementing themethod of finalizing the plan by reversing an order of plan steps of theplan as illustrated in the flow diagram of FIG. 20A; and

FIG. 21 is a block diagram of an embodiment of a processor-based systemfor implementing one or more operations of a method for determining acomputational plan for a data-dependent constraint network.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

Referring now to the drawings wherein the showings are for purposes ofillustrating various embodiments of the present disclosure, shown inFIG. 1A is a diagram of a data-independent constraint network 101 havingone relation node 114 and five variable nodes 120 that are eachconnected to the relation node 114 by an arc 110. The relation node 114represents an equality constraint, R1, or equation. Each one of thevariable nodes, x, a, S, b, and y, represents a variable. FIG. 1Billustrates the equality constraint R1 of FIG. 1A wherein theconditional is embedded within the equality constraint. Indata-independent constraint networks 101, the applicability of theconstraint that is used to compute the value of any variable 122 doesnot depend on the values of other variables 122 in the constraintnetwork 100.

FIG. 2A is a diagram of a data-dependent constraint network 100represented as a bipartite graph 106 having relation nodes 114 andvariable nodes 120 interconnected by arcs 110. The relation nodes 114represent equality constraints, R1a, R2a. The variable nodes 120represent the five variables, x, a, S, b, and y. FIG. 2B illustrates theequality constraints 116 represented by the relation nodes 114 of FIG.2A. In a data-dependent constraint network 100, an equality constraint116 is active only when a boolean condition 118 is satisfied. Forexample, as shown in FIG. 2B, R1a is active if S=s1 and R2a is active ifS=s2. The variable S is a state variable 124 which is defined as aspecial variable that is used in the enabling conditions of equalityconstraints 116. A state variable 124 comprises either a booleanvariable (not shown), or a categorical variable 136 having discretevalues over a finite domain (e.g., a set of states) known to theconstraint network 100.

FIG. 3 is an example of a data-dependent constraint network 100 havingfour relation nodes 114 representing equality constraints, R1, R2, R3,and R4, and seven variable nodes 120 representing seven variables, V1,V2, V3, V4, P, Q, and S. Each relation node 114 includes the name of theconstraint, e.g., R2, preceded by a logic expression with implied statevariables 124 which must be true for the constraint to be active. In anexample, the equality constraints 116 may have the following conditions:

R1: Unconditionally: V2=V1

R2: When S=s1 Or Q=q1:V3=V2+2:

R3: Unconditionally: S=If(V1<10,s1,If(V1<20,s2,s3))

R4: When P=p1,Q=If(V4<5,q1,q2)

In the constraint network 100 of FIG. 3, the variables P, Q, and S arestate variables 124 having discrete values in a finite set as indicatedabove. In the example above, P ranges over the values, {p1, p2}, Sranges over the values, {s1, s2, s3}, and Q ranges over the values {q1,q2}.

FIG. 4A is a diagram of the constraint network 100 of FIG. 3 with thebolded arcs 110 illustrating steps (1), (2), and (3) that may beincluded in a computational plan 102 from input variable node V1 tooutput variable node V3. In the present disclosure, an input variablenode is interchangeably referred to as an input variable, an input node,or an input. An output variable node is interchangeably referred to asan output variable, an output node, or an output. A data dependentconstraint network is interchangeably referred to as a constraintnetwork or a network. A conditional computational plan isinterchangeably referred to as a conditional plan, a computational plan,or a plan.

Advantageously, in the present disclosure, a computational plan 102 froman input 126 (e.g., an input variable node) to an output 128 (e.g., anoutput variable node) may be determined for a data-dependent constraintnetwork 100 represented by a bipartite graph 106 using a backwardchaining search of the bipartite graph 106 for situations where a searchbranch 112 (e.g., an arc) is valid, as described in greater detailbelow. The computational planning process involves the use of mutuallyrecursive routines as described below for tracking the situations inwhich a given search branch 112 is valid for a given world set. Asdescribed below, a world 138 (FIG. 7) comprises a complete specificationof the value of all of the state variables 124 in the constraint network100. A world set 140 (FIG. 7) is a set of worlds 138 and is defined by adefined by a well formed formula (WFF) 142 (FIG. 7) involving the statevariables 124. In FIG. 4A, the dashed arcs 110 indicate the dependenceof the search state on state variables 124. In the present disclosure, avariable is dependent, independent, or undetermined in a world set if itis respectively dependent, independent, or undetermined in all of theworlds of the world set. A maximal world set associated with a variablebeing dependent, independent, or undetermined is the set of all worldsin which that variable is respectively dependent, independent, orundetermined.

FIG. 4B illustrates a computational plan 102 from the input 126 variablenode V1 to the output 128 variable node V3 for the constraint network100 of FIG. 4A. As disclosed herein, a plan 102 for a constraint network100 comprises a list of arcs 110 and a condition under which therelation (e.g., the equation represented by the relation node) attachedto the arc 110 is to be used to compute the variable 122 attached to thearc 110. A plan 102 may also include a list of strong components 132(FIG. 6B) representing fundamental cycles in the bipartite graph 106.

In a plan 102, each one of the arcs 110 and/or strong components 132 maybe ordered in such a manner that one may check the applicability of astep of the plan 102 based on the values of variables 122 alreadycomputed by the plan 102 or based on variables 122 that are otherwiseavailable outside the plan 102. Variables 122 that are available outsideof the plan 102 are described as stubs 130 to the plan 102. Stubs 130are located immediately upstream of the steps of the plan, but are notpart of the plan 102. The values of the stubs 130 are required forperforming the computations of the plan 102. In FIG. 4A, Q is a stub 130to the plan from variable V1 to variable V3. Variable V3 is a specialcase of a stub 130 when the plan 102 does not have a computational pathfrom V1 to V3 as would be the case in the example (FIG. 4A) if neitherS=s1 nor Q=q1.

FIG. 5 is a diagram of a data-dependent constraint network 100 having aregion with overlapping strong components 108 encircled by a dashedline. The constraint network in FIG. 5 also includes arcs 110 havingalternative directions 111 between a relation node 114 and a variablenode 120. In the constraint network 100 as disclosed herein, each one ofthe equality constraints 116 is shown as a rectangle with the name ofthe equality constraint 116 preceded by a boolean condition 118 on astate variable 124. For example, in FIG. 5, the upper left-hand equalityconstraint, A2, is active when the state variable S=s1. The equalityconstraint, A2a, is active when the state variable S=s2. The notation,T, as in T:R2, indicates that the equality constraint, R2, isunconditionally active and is in the True state.

FIG. 6A is a diagram of the constraint network 100 of FIG. 5 whereinseveral of the arcs 110 and strong components 132 are bolded to indicatethat such arcs 110 and strong components 132 are included in the stepsof the plan 102 from input variable node “bar” to output variable nodev5. FIG. 6B shows a chart that lists the values for the input 126, theoutput 128, and the specific steps of the plan 102 from input “bar” tooutput v5 of the constraint network 100 of FIG. 6A. Also shown are thestubs 130 to the plan 102 which are variables 122 that are locatedimmediately upstream of the steps of the plan 102 but which are notcomputed by the plan. In the chart of FIG. 6B, S, y1, y3, v2, v7, and v5are stubs 130 to the plan from “bar” to v5.

Referring to FIG. 7, in the present disclosure, a world 138 is definedas a complete specification of the value of all of the state variables124 in a constraint network 100. As an example, if Q is a booleanvariable and S is a categorical variable with the possible values in{s1, s2, s3} and if Q and S are the only state variables 124 in theconstraint network 100, then there are six possible worlds:

-   -   1. Q And S=s1    -   2. Q And S=s2    -   3. Q And S=s3    -   4. Not(Q) and S=s1    -   5. Not(Q) and S=s2    -   6. Not(Q) And S=s3

In FIG. 7, shown is a table listing the world sets 140 involving theboolean state variable Q and the categorical state variable S withvalues in {s1, s2, s3}. As indicated above, a world set 140 is definedby a well-formed formula (WFF) 142 involving state variables 124. Worldsets 140 may comprise arbitrary logical forms involving the operatorsAnd, Or, Not, and the predicates involving the state variables 124. Aconstraint management system may include routines for converting logicsentences to either conjunctive normal form or disjunctive normal form,while simultaneously using the finite domain properties for the statevariables to simplify negations, and unions. An example of performing asimplification may be disclosed in application Ser. No. 13/422,335 filedon Mar. 16, 2012, and entitled SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR RAPID MANAGEMENT OFLOGIC FORMULAS.

FIG. 8 is a diagram of a bipartite graph 106 defined by a data-dependentconstraint network 100 for which a computational plan 102 (FIG. 6B) maybe determined. The method of determining the plan 102 may includeselecting or specifying variable nodes 120 as inputs 126 representingstarting points for the plan 102, selecting or specifying variable nodes120 as outputs 128 to be computed by the plan 102, and defining theworld set 140 (FIG. 7) in which one wants the plan 102 to be valid. Ifinput 126 variables are not specified, then all the input 126 variablesin the constraint network 100 that influence the value of the output 128variable(s) are computed by the method to use as the input 126variables. The method of determining the plan 102 starts in a statewhere the specified input 126 variables are already in the independentstate.

The method herein includes moving or traversing through the constraintnetwork 100 from the inputs 126 to the outputs 128 during a backwardchaining search of the bipartite graph 106. During the search process, arelevant or appropriate world set 140 is maintained along each branch ofthe search. The search may start with a variable 122 (e.g., an outputvariable node 120) and may proceed up through the variable's incomingarcs 110, each for a different world set 140, to the relation node 114that is connected to the variable's incoming arcs 110. The process thenmoves upstream of those relations through their incoming arcs 110 to thevariables 122 attached to the relation's incoming arcs 110. The processis recursive at the new variables 122 located upstream of the relations,as described in greater detail below.

The method may further include specifying a world set 140 in which thecomputational plan 102 is desired. If world set 140 is not specified,the method automatically computes the maximal world set 140 in which theoutput 128 nodes are in a determined state. The result computed ordetermined by the method is a computational plan 102 containing an inputlist 220, an output list 218, a stub queue 234, and a plan queue 236. Inthe present disclosure, input list is used interchangeably with inputqueue, and output list is used interchangeably with output queue. Theelements of the input list 220 comprise an association between an input126 variable and an input 126 variable world set 140 wherein the input126 variable world set 140 is the maximal world set 140 in which theinput 126 variable is independent and wherein one or more of output 128variables are dependent on that input 126 variable in that world set140. The elements of the output list 218 comprise an association betweena variable node 120 and the maximal world set 140 in which the variablenode 120 is determined. A plan queue 236 comprises an ordered list ofplan steps having elements comprising an association between a plan stepand the world set 140 in which the plan step is to be executed. A planstep comprises either (1) an arc 110 associated with a computationalmethod to compute a value of a single one of the variable nodes 120 or,(2) a component 132 associated with a computational method tosimultaneously compute the value of a plurality of the variable nodes120 in the component 132. The elements of a stub queue 234 comprise anassociation between a stub variable node 120 and a world set 140. A stub130 variable is any variable 122 that is needed in one or more plansteps but is independent of any of the specified input 126 variables,and the world set 140 associated with that stub 130 variable is theworld set 140 in which the stub 130 variable is needed to evaluate theone or more plan steps.

In the method disclosed herein, if inputs 126 are specified as argumentsto the method, the method updates the input list 220 by adding the input126 to the input list 220 along with any specified world set or Trueworld set. The method updates the output list by adding the outputvariable node 128 and the specified world set 140 to the output list ifthe output variable node 128 is in a determined state for the entiretyof the specified world set 140, and then updates the conditional plan102 using a backward chaining search along a search path by recursivelyperforming the following operations: finding the plan for a variablenode 120 in a given world set 140; finding the plan for a component 132in a given world set 140; finding the plan for a relation node 114 in agiven world set 140; and finding the plan for arcs 110 in a given worldset 140. During the backward chaining search, the presently-disclosedmethod uses the following operations to update the conditional plan102—adding plan step; adding plan stub; adding plan input; and addingplan output. The world sets 140 that are applied during such operationsevolve during the backward chaining search according to the nature ofthe arc 110 and relation 114 conditions, as described below. When theabove-noted process is completed for all of the output 128 variables,the method includes a “FinalizePlan” 214 routine to complete the plan102, and return the completed conditional plan 102, as illustrated inFIGS. 9A-20B and described in greater detail below.

The recursive operations comprising the backward chaining search startwith finding a plan 102 for a variable node 120 which, in turn, followsthe inflow arcs 110 backwards along a search path. In the presentdisclosure, an inflow arc 110 is interchangeably referred to as anincoming arc 110. It should be noted that the enabling world sets 140for the inflow arcs 110 associated with a given variable node 120 are,by necessity, disjoint. The world set 140 that is used for the nextelement along an inflow arc 110 will be the intersection of the arc'senabling world set and the incoming world set. Each inflow arc 110 leadsto either finding a plan for a component 132 (e.g., using the“FindPlanForComponent” 222 routine—FIG. 14A) if the arc 110 is part of acomponent 132, or finding a plan for a relation (e.g., using the“FindPlanForRnode” 224 routine—FIG. 15A) if the arc 110 is not part of acomponent 132. These methods in turn call on the routine“FindPlanForArcs” 228 (FIG. 16A), on all the arcs 110 of the component132 predecessors or relation inflow arcs 110, depending on the case, andremoving state variable dependence as needed.

As the search path is traversed through a relation node 114, component132, variable node 120, or along an arc 110, the method maintains theappropriate world set 140 along the path as the intersection of theevolving world set 140 with each enabling world set 140 of the elementsin the path. The method may initially note or determine whether anysearch path starting with a predecessor arc 110 of a plan step ends at aspecified input 126 variable node 120 and, if so, update the stub queue234 with a stub variable and an associated stub world set 140. The stubvariable comprises the variable associated with any other predecessorarc 110 whose search paths do not terminate at any of the specifiedinput 126 variables. The stub world set comprises the union of the worldsets 140 of those search paths.

The method or process for finding (e.g., determining) a computationalplan 102 may be described by way of example with reference to FIG. 8. Ina process for determining a computational plan 102 from variable node v4to v3, the plan 102 may be initialized with an input 126 list with thevariable v4 in the False world set. The world set may be later amendedas search paths are determined from v3 back to v4 in different worldsets. The process may start at variable node v3 in the True world, andmay include searching along v3's incoming arcs, R2->v3 and R6->v3.Without loss of generality, it is assumed that the first search R6->v3has an associated world set of S=s2̂Q=q2. The search may continue to theincoming arcs to R6 (v5->R6, Q->R6, S->R6) with return of “success” ifone of the input nodes is found along any path. For example, the processmay include searching v5->R6 with associated world set True. ConjoiningTrue with the current world set, S=s2̂Q=q2, results in S=s2̂Q=q2̂T, whichsimplifies to S=s2̂Q=q2.

Referring still to FIG. 8, the process may continue with a search of theupstream arcs of v5, of which there is only one, R5->v5, and eventuallyfinishing at node v4 in world set S=s2̂Q=q2, such that v4 is added to theplan input list 220 disjoining the world set 140 previously associatedwith v4 with the world set 140 that was used to get to v4 along thecurrent search branch. At this stage, the world set 140 is(S=s2̂Q=q2)vFalse, which simplifies to S=s2̂Q=q2. Continuing the processwill result in arriving at v4 in world sets P=p1̂S=s2, and other worldsets 140. The final result is that v4 is an input to the plan to v3 inthe world set (P=p1̂Q=q2)V(P=p1̂S=s2), and wherein there is no plan in thenegation of this world set.

In the present disclosure, the system and method advantageously providesa means for handling a scenario wherein a state variable 124 isencountered in the search path and the world set 140 of the searchbranch 112 to that state variable 124 includes the same state variable.Such a scenario is illustrated in FIG. 8 when going up the Q->R6 arc 110and a plan is still needed for Q. In this scenario, Q must be removedfrom the world set 140 before proceeding further, because the executionof a plan to determine a state variable 124 such as Q cannot depend onthe value of that state variable 124 in any of the predecessors tocomputing the state variable 124. The new world set 140 would thereforebecome S=s2 only. The process would include going up the incoming arcsof Q to R4, conjoining the enabling state of R4, which is P=p1, withS=s2, which returns P=p1̂S=s2. Going up the incoming arcs arrives at v4again in the state P=p1̂S=s2. A different search branch arrives at v4 instate S=s1̂P=p1. The Q dependence is removed when going through the nodeQ.

A further advantage provided by the system and method disclosed hereinis the addition of a search branch 112 from a relation to a given statevariable 124 even if the relation does not depend on the state variable124. Such a search branch 112 is added if that state variable 124 iscontained in the world set 140 associated with the search branch 112getting to that relation. Added search branches 112 are defined as ghostarcs 110 and are shown in dashed font in FIG. 8. The requirement to addsuch search branches 112 is a result of the requirement that a statevariable 124 must be a predecessor of the plan 102 going through therelation if the execution of the relation will be conditioned by a worldset 140 containing the state variables 124.

In the present disclosure, provided is a method for creating,determining, or finding a computational plan 102 (FIG. 6B) for computingthe values of a user specified set of output variables 122 (FIG. 8) froma user specified set of input variables 122 of a data-dependentconstraint network 100 (FIG. 8) represented by a bipartite graph 106.The presence of one or more equality constraints in the constraintnetwork 100 may depend upon the values of one or more variables 122 inthe constraint network 100. A significant advantage of the disclosedmethod is the avoidance of intermixing of planning and computation asrequired by traditional conditional planning methods. The avoidance ofintermixing of the planning and the computation results in a significantreduction in the amount of time required to perform the computationalsteps during trade studies that explore different regions of a designspace.

The presently-disclosed system and method imposes conditions on thenature of the data-dependent constraint network 100 (FIG. 8) that arerequired for operation of the system and method. The data-dependentcondition on each relation in the constraint network 100 is specified bya well-formed formula (WFF) which, as indicated above, is a logicalsentence formed using AND, OR, and NOT operators connecting basepredicates over finite domains. In the present disclosure, the value ofany variable 122 involved in a condition on an equality constraint 116(FIG. 8) must be over a known finite range. For example, the value of anengine in a hypersonic vehicle study may vary over the engine types:“rocket”, “ramjet”, “scramjet”, and other engine types. Variables 122with continuous values such as aerodynamic drag cannot be used directlyas conditioning values for a relation. Rather, in the presentdisclosure, such variables 122 may be quantized into a finite set forconditioning purposes. For example, the quantized variable “dragLevel”may be defined with a constraint such as dragLevel=Case ({drag<x1,“negligibleDrag”}, {drag<=x2, “lowDrag”}, {Else, “highDrag”}) and thendifferent equality relations may be conditioned for computing flightbehavior dependent on the value of dragLevel.

Referring now to FIGS. 9A-20B, shown are routines and the correspondingpseudo code that may be implemented in a method for determining acomputational plan 102 (FIG. 6B) for a data-dependent constraint network100 (FIG. 8) represented by a bipartite graph similar to the bipartitegraph 106 illustrated in FIG. 8. The routines shown in FIGS. 9A-20A mayinclude one or more functions to facilitate the determination of thecomputational plan 102. Such routines may be written into programminginstructions for the method and/or the routines may be included in theunderlying programming language. The following comprises a briefdescription of functions, objects, and object attributes that may beincluded in the routines.

rnode: a relation node in the bipartite graph.

vnode: a variable node in the bipartite graph.

arc: an arc connecting a given vnode to a given rnode.

graph: either the top level bipartite graph or a strong component withinthat graph.

ArcRnode(arc): the rnode connected to the given arc.

ArcVnode(arc): the vnode connected to the given arc.

RnodeArcs (rnode): the set of arcs connected to the given rnode.

VnodeArcs (vnode): the set of arcs connected to the given vnode.

Union(ws[1], ws[2], . . . ): the disjunction or union of all the worldsspecified in the input list of world sets, ws[1], ws[2], . . . .

Intersection(ws[1], ws[2], . . . ): the conjunction or intersection ofall the worlds specified in the input list of world sets, ws[1], ws[2],. . . .

ComponentVnodes(component): The vnodes that are in the strong component.

ComponentPredecessorArcs (component): The predecessor arcs of the strongcomponent defined as arcs that point into relations in the componentsenabling world set.

EnablingWorldSet(object): The world set in which the object is enabled.This is defined for vnodes, rnodes, components, and arcs.

WorldSetStateVariables (worldSet): The state variables that are specificto the specified world set.

In the present disclosure, the system and method for determining acomputational plan 102 (FIG. 6B) includes maintaining a set of mappings(not shown) that allow for world set attributes of the nodes. Forexample, such world set attributes may include a variable node's statussuch as: the world set in which the variable node is independent, theworld set in which the variable node is undetermined, the world set inwhich the variable node is determined by different equality constraints,and other attributes. The domain of a world set mapping is a partitionof the nodes enabling world set comprising the union of all worlds inwhich the variable node has an existence. For example, given a relationnode with enabling world set “rnodeWS”, the world set mapping for theoutgoing arcs attribute (e.g., an outgoing arc of a relation node pointsto the variable that the relation node is defining in the given worldset) may be defined as follows:

ws₁ = arc₁ ws₂ = arc₂ ⋯ ws_(i)⋂ws_(j) = φ${{ws}_{i} \neq {\varphi \bigcup\limits_{i}{ws}_{i}}} = {rnodeWS}$arc_(i) ≠ arc_(j)

In the present disclosure, the constraint network 100 maintains theabove-described world set attribute maps, and includes procedures forre-partitioning an attribute map with respect to a specified world set,as represented by the following function:

output Map<-RepartitionMap(inputMap,worldSet)

wherein outputMap is generally the same as the inputMap (not shown)except that outputMap is restricted to worldSet. In the presentdisclosure, restructuring may be required to ensure that the outputMapis a partition of worldSet in the sense that, when intersecting worldSetwith the elements in the original inputMap, some of the intersectionsmay be empty and therefore may not be present in the resultant map.

In the present disclosure, the constraint management system orconstraint network 100 (the terms being used interchangeably herein) mayinclude the following lookup functions:

WorldSetValue(attributeMap,worldSet)

which may return the attribute specified by the given world set if andonly if worldSet is subsumed by (i.e., equals or is a proper subset of)only one of the world sets in the attributeMap, otherwise, the lookupfunction WorldSetValue 230 (FIG. 15A) returns empty.

For the pseudo code illustrated in FIGS. 9B-20B, the following world setattribute maps may be managed by the constraint network 100:

InflowMap(vnode): The mapping from a world set to the arc directedtoward the given vnode in that world set.

OutflowArcs (rnode): The mapping from a world set to an outflow arc fromthe relation in that world set. An outflow arc in a given world set isnothing more than an arc whose direction is pointing away from the rnodein the given world set.

StatusMap(vnode): The mapping from a world set to the status attributeof the vnode in the given world set.

ArcGraphs(arc): An arc can be in multiple strong components as well asin no strong component in different world states. This world setattribute records the mapping from a world set to the strong componentthe arc is in for the given world set as well as a map from a world setto the top level constraint graph for the world set for which the arc isnot in any strong component.

ArcDirectionMap(arc): A mapping from a world set to the direction of thearc—either towards the vnode, towards the rnode, or undirected.

The pseudo code illustrated in FIGS. 9B-20B may also include thefollowing functions for defining a specific data structure for a planwhich may be defined as an object having the following attributes:

inputQueue(plan): the set of input variables to the plan.

outputQueue(plan): The set of output variables to the plan.

stepStack(plan): The ordered set of step objects in the plan. Each stepobject is a pair <worldSet, step> where the step is to be executed if weare in one of the worlds in worldSet, and step is either an arcconnecting an upstream rnode to its immediate downstream vnode in thegiven worldSet or a strong component in that worldSet.

stubQueue(plan): The set of stub variables in the plan. Stub variablesare variables immediately upstream of some step (i.e., arc or strongcomponent) in the plan, but which is not downstream of any of the planinputs. The values of the stub variables are required when executing theplan steps.

Referring to FIGS. 9A-9B, shown in FIG. 9A is a flow diagram having oneor more operations that may be included in a method for finding (e.g.,determining) a computational plan 102 (FIG. 6B) for a data-dependentconstraint network 100 (FIG. 8). FIG. 9B is a pseudo-code listing of ahigh-level routine “FindPlan (graph, inputs, outputs, worldSet)” forfinding (e.g., determining) a computational plan 102 for adata-dependent constraint network 100 in the manner illustrated in FIG.9A. As indicated above, the constraint network 100 is represented by abipartite graph 106 (FIG. 8) containing variable nodes 120 (FIG. 8) andrelation nodes 114 (FIG. 8) interconnected by arcs 110 (FIG. 8). The“FindPlan” routine 200 returns either the plan 102 from “inputs” (e.g.,input variable nodes) to “outputs” (e.g., output variable nodes), or the“FindPlan” routine 200 returns “Fail” if one or more of the outputs isnot determined in the constraint network 100. The arguments in theroutine 200 include:

graph: a structure representing the bipartite graph defined by thedata-dependent constraint network.

outputs: a list of variables that the plan computes.

inputs: a list of variables that comprise starting points for the plan.

worldSet: the world set in which the plan is determined to be valid.

The routine “FindPlan” 200 may include initializing the plan structure202 as described below. In the “FindPlan” 200 routine, if no inputs 126are specified in the arguments list, then the computational plan 102will contain as inputs 126 all independent variables 122 that arelocated upstream of the outputs 128. If inputs 126 are specified, thenthe inputs 126 for the computational plan 102 will be restricted to theinputs in the specified arguments list. For each input 126, the routine“AddPlanIput” 208 may be implemented to add variable nodes 120 to aninput queue 220 of the plan 102 as described below. For each output 128,a routine “VnodeDeterminedWorldSet” 204 may be implemented to determinea world set 140 in which a status of the variable nodes 120 isdetermined. A routine “AddPlanOutput” 206 may also be implemented foreach output 128 to update the output queue for that output 128. Inaddition, for each output 128, a routine “FindPlanForVnode” 210 may beimplemented to find a plan 102 for a given variable node 120. Theroutine “AddPlanStub” 212 may also be implemented to update the stubqueue for each stub variable found during the backward chaining searchprocess as described below. The routine “FinalizePlan” 214 may finalizethe plan 102 by reversing the order of plan steps (not shown) determinedin “FindPlan”.

Referring to FIGS. 10A-10B, shown in FIG. 10A is a flow diagram havingone or more operations that may be included in the routine“VnodeDeterminedWorldSet(worldSet, vnode)” 204. The routine 204 may beconfigured to determine a world set 140 in which a status of thevariable nodes 120 is determined (either dependent or independent.) FIG.10B is a pseudo-code listing of the routine “VnodeDeterminedWorldSet”204 illustrated in the flow diagram of FIG. 10A. The routine returns theworld set 140 in which the status of the vnode 120 (i.e., variable node)is determined. The routine 204 incorporates the following arguments:

worldSet: input world set used to partition the vnode status' map.

vnode: the variable node for which the determined world set is needed.

Without loss of generality, the status attribute map of vnode is assumedto be:

ws[1]− > status[1], ws[2]− > status[2], ⋯

wherein ws[j] are world sets that form a disjoint partition of theenabling state of vnode. More specifically,

Union (ws[j], j=1, . . . , n)=vnode enabling world set, which istypically True, and

ws[i]≠Φ,

ws[i] Λws[j]=Φ, and

status[i]≠status[j].

In the routine “VnodeDeterminedWorldSet” 204, the status[j] range overvalues that allow the constraint network 100 (FIG. 8) to determine ifthe node has an arc 110 (FIG. 8) pointing to it in the ws[j]: isindependent in the ws[j], is dependent in the ws[j], etc. Arcs 110 havea direction attribute map in the sense that an arc 110 can be directedtoward their rnode 114 (FIG. 8), directed toward their vnode 120 (FIG.8), or undirected simultaneously but in different world sets 140. In thepresent disclosure, a vnode 120 may have status “determined” in a worldset 140 if and only if it is either (a) “independent” in that world set140 or a super-set thereof or, (b) it has an arc 110 whose direction istoward the vnode 120 in the given world set 140 and the immediatelyupstream vnodes 120 of the rnode 114 (i.e., upstream with respect to agiven world set 140) attached to that arc 110 are determined in thatworld set 140.

Referring to FIGS. 11A-11B, shown in FIG. 11A is a flow diagram havingone or more operations that may be included in the routine“AddPlanOutput (vnode, worldSet, plan)”. The routine 206 is configuredto update the output queue 218 for the plan 102. The plan structure mayinclude a stub queue (not shown), a plan queue (not shown), and anoutput queue 218. FIG. 11B is a pseudo-code listing of the routine“AddPlanOutput” 206 illustrated in the flow diagram of FIG. 11A.“AddPlanOutput” 206 may include the function “outputQueue” 218 and mayincorporate the following arguments:

vnode: the output variable being added to the plan.

worldSet: the world set in which vnode is an output variable.

plan: the plan being modified, the structure of which is describedbelow.

As indicated above, the plan structure maintains a stub queue, a planqueue, and an output queue. Each queue comprises a set of orderedentries with each entry includes a world set 140 and an elementassociated with the world set 140. The elements for the stub queue andoutput queue 218 are variables 122 (FIG. 8). The elements for the planqueue are either arcs 110 (FIG. 8) or strong components 132 (FIG. 8)representing steps in the plan. For example:

output queue = { <vnode[1], ws[1]>, <vnode[2], ws[2]>, ...}

Referring to FIGS. 12A-12B, shown in FIG. 12A is a flow diagram havingone or more operations that may be included in the routine “AddPlanInput(vnode, specifiedInputs?, worldSet, plan)”. The routine 208 isconfigured to add variable nodes 120 and the associated world sets tothe input queue 220 of the plan 102. FIG. 12B is a pseudo-code listingof the routine “AddPlanInput” 208 illustrated in the flow diagram ofFIG. 12A. If the vnode 120 is not present in the input queue, the vnodeand the associated world set are added to the input queue, or if thevnode 120 is already present, then its associated world set 140 isupdated. If specifiedInputs? Is False or if the vnode is alreadypresent, the routine 208 returns True, otherwise, the routine returnsFalse.

Referring to FIGS. 13A-13B, shown in FIG. 13A is a flow diagram havingone or more operations that may be included in the routine“FindPlanForVnode (vnode, specifiedInputs?, worldSet, plan)”. FIG. 13Bis a pseudo-code listing of the routine “FindPlanForVnode” 210illustrated in the flow diagram of FIG. 13A. The routine 210 mayincorporate the following arguments:

vnode: the variable node for which we seek a plan.

specifiedInputs?: If true, then the list of inputs is restricted touser-specified inputs. If false, then any independent variable may be aninput to the plan if the variable is located upstream of an outputvariable.

worldSet: the world set for which the plan is relevant.

plan: the plan structure being modified by this element of the planningprocess.

The “FindPlanForVnode” 210 routine is mutually recursive with theroutines “FindPlanForRnode” 224, “FindPlanForArcs” 228, and“FindPlanForComponent” 222 illustrated in FIGS. 14A-16D and describedbelow. As indicated above, the constraint management system orconstraint network 100 is configured to maintain an inflow world setattribute map for each vnode 120. The inflow world set attribute map isa mapping from world sets 140 to arcs 110 where an arc 110 is directedtoward a vnode 120 in that world set 140 and/or a world set 140 to acode for:Independent to indicate that the vnode 120 is independent inthat world set 140. In the method disclosed herein, the process loopsover all of the inflows of the vnode 120, collecting the boolean plansuccess for each inflow. If any of the inflows return success, then theunion of the world sets 140 of failed inflows is where the vnode 120 isadded as a stub 130, and the process returns success from such vnode120. Otherwise, the process returns failure from such vnode 120. Ifadding plan 102 input 126 (“AddPlanInput” 208) is successful (i.e., doesnot return nil), then the process returns success from that independentinflow. If an inflow is split into pieces due to the presence of strongcomponents 132, then the pieces are treated as though they are separateinflows.

Referring to FIGS. 14A-14B, shown in FIG. 14A is a flow diagram havingone or more operations that may be included in the routine“FindPlanForComponent (component, specifiedInputs?, worldSet, plan)”.The routine 222 is configured to return True or False, depending uponwhether the routine succeeds in finding a plan 102 for a strongcomponent. FIG. 14B is a pseudo-code listing of the routine“FindPlanForComponent” 222 illustrated in the flow diagram of FIG. 14A.The routine may incorporate the following arguments:

component: the strong component for which a plan is desired.

specifiedInputs?: If true, then the list of inputs is restricted touser-specified inputs. If false, then any independent variable may be aninput to the plan if the variable is located upstream of an outputvariable.

worldSet: the world set for which the plan is sought.

plan: the plan structure that exists so far in the search.

Referring to FIGS. 15A-15B, shown in FIG. 15A is a flow diagram havingone or more operations that may be included in the routine“FindPlanForRnode (rnode, specifiedInputs?, worldSet, plan)”. Theroutine 224 is configured to return True or False, depending uponwhether one finds a plan for the rnode 114 in the specified world set140 or not. FIG. 15B is a pseudo-code listing of the routine“FindPlanForRnode” 224 illustrated in the flow diagram of FIG. 15A. Theroutine 224 may incorporate the following arguments:

rnode: the equality constraint (i.e., the relation node) for which oneis seeking a plan.

specifiedInputs?: If true, then the list of inputs is restricted touser-specified inputs. If false, then any independent variable may be aninput to the plan if the variable is located upstream of an outputvariable.

worldSet: the world set for which one wants a plan for rnode.

plan: the plan structure being modified by the routine and whichcontains the results of the search so far conducted.

Referring to FIGS. 16A-16D, shown in FIGS. 16A-16B is a flow diagramhaving one or more operations that may be included in the routine“FindPlanForArcs 110 (stepObject, specifiedInputs?, arcs, worldSet,plan)”. The routine 228 is configured to find a plan for the inputargument, stepObject, where the step is either an arc 110 or a strongcomponent 132. The routine 228 will return True or False depending uponwhether the routine finds the plan. FIG. 16C-16D is a pseudo-codelisting of the routine “FindPlanForArcs” 228 illustrated in the flowdiagram of FIG. 16A-16B. The routine may incorporate the followingarguments:

stepObject: the step for which one is seeking a plan and is either anarc or a strong component.

specifiedInputs?: If true, then the list of inputs is restricted touser-specified inputs. If false, then any independent variable may be aninput to the plan 102 if the variable is located upstream of an outputvariable.

arcs: the set of arcs located upstream of the strong component or rnodeconnected to the stepObject.

worldSet: the world set in which the plan is desired.

plan: The plan structure being modified by the routine and whichcontains the results of the search so far.

Referring to FIGS. 17A-17B, shown in FIG. 17A is a flow diagram havingone or more operations that may be included in the routine “AddPlanStub(vnode, worldSet, plan)”. The routine 212 is configured to return Trueor False, depending upon whether one finds a plan 102 for the rnode 114in the specified world set 140 or not. FIG. 17B is a pseudo-code listingof the routine “AddPlanStub” 212 illustrated in the flow diagram of FIG.17A. The routine 212 modifies the plan structure by adding the variablenode 120 (i.e., vnode) to the set of stubbed variables 122 of the plan102 in the world set 140 (i.e., worldSet). The “AddPlanStub” 212 plan102 maintains a queue of stub 130 entries wherein each entry is anassociation of a variable node 120 and a world set 140 in the sense thatthe variable node 120 is a stub 130 of the plan 102 in the associatedworld set 140. The routine 212 either modifies a pre-existing entry ofthe vnode 120 in the stub queue 234 of the plan 102 by forming the unionof the associated world set 140 with that entry with the input 126 worldset 140, worldSet, or the routine 212 adds a new entry for the pair<vnode, worldSet>.

Referring to FIGS. 18A-18B, shown in FIG. 18A is a flow diagram havingone or more operations that may be included in the routine “AddPlanStep(stepObject, worldSet, predecessors, plan)”. The routine 238 isconfigured to return True or False, depending upon whether one finds aplan for the rnode 114 in the specified world set 140 or not. FIG. 18Bis a pseudo-code listing of the routine “AddPlanStep” 238 illustrated inthe flow diagram of FIG. 18A. The routine 238 maintains a stack,“stepStack(plan)” of maps, “world-set->step”, where each step (i.e., anarc or a strong component) is to be executed when the plan is invoked ifthe associated world set 140 is true in the current data environment.During the backward chaining search of the constraint network, the stackis maintained in reverse order and is re-ordered at the end of thesearch process using the routine Finalize(plan) 214 as described below.The routine “AddPlanStep” 238 places the step object as early aspossible in the stack but after all its predecessors 240. The routine238 destructively modifies the plan step stack so that the step objectis applicable in the given world set 140 and returns the new or modifiedentry. The routine 238 may incorporate the following arguments:

stepObject: either an arc or a strong component representing a step inthe plan that potentially will be executed when the plan is invoked.

worldSet: the world set that must be true in the invoked plan's dataenvironment for the associated step to be executed.

predecessors: the variable nodes that are located immediately upstreamof the relation node and wherein each variable node is conditioned by aworld set upon which the value of the object depends in that world set.

In the pseudo code of FIG. 18B, the function Rest(list) returns the samelist structure, but starts at the second element in the list. Thefunction First(list) returns the first element in the list. The functiongetObject(ws->object) returns the object in the map element ws->object.The function getWorldSet(ws->object) returns the world set in the mapelement.

Referring to FIGS. 19A-19B, shown in FIG. 19B is a flow diagram havingone or more operations that may be included in the routine“StepWorldSetInPlan (stepObject, plan)”. The “StepWorldSetInPlan” 232routine is configured to return the union of all world sets 140 that areassociated with the input 126 step object in the plan. FIG. 19B is apseudo-code listing of the routine “StepWorldSetInPlan” 232 illustratedin the flow diagram of FIG. 19A. The routine 232 may incorporate thefollowing arguments:

stepObject: the given object for which an associated world set is beingrequested.

plan: the plan having plan steps that are being investigated for a matchto the given step object.

The system and method of determining a plan 102 for a constraint network100 may also include a function “RemoveStateDependence(vnode, worldSet)”(not shown) for removing the dependence of worldSet on the statevariable 124 vnode 120 as described above with regard to FIG. 8.Advantageously, the function “RemoveStateDependence” avoids infinitelooping while also ensuring that the plan 102 includes steps to computethe values of state variables 124 when such state variables 124 areneeded in the computational path. The function “RemoveStateDependence”may incorporate the following arguments:

vnode: the state variable for which one needs to remove dependence.

worldSet: the world set for which one need to remove possible dependenceon the values of the state variable, vnode.

The “RemoveStateDependence” 226 function replaces literals and negationsof literals involving the specified state variable in thewell-formed-formula (WFF) representation of the world set with True, andthen simplifies the result. For example, removing dependence on S in theWFF, “S=s1 And Q=q2” yields “True And Q=q2”, which simplifies to “Q=q2”.Removing dependence on S in the WFF, “S=s1 Or Q=q2”, yields “True OrQ=q2”, which simplifies to “True”.

Implementation of the “RemoveStateDependence” 226 function is dependenton the data structure that is used to represent the world set 140. Inone example, Lisp list structures (i.e., Allegro Common Lisp,commercially available from Franz, Inc., of Oakland, Calif.) may be usedto represent the well formed formula that specifies the world set 140.In another example, multi-dimensional bit arrays (not shown) may be usedto represent a world set wherein each dimension of the bit array may beassociated with a given state variable and wherein the size of thatdimension equals the number of specific values that the state variablecould take.

In this regard, the WFFs associated with each computational step may beobtained by combinations of union, intersection, and/or differenceoperators to the WFFs associated with the equations that need to besolved. Such WFFs can become highly complex, depending upon whichvariables in the constraint network 100 are independent, and requirerapid manipulation and combination of such propositional WFFs. The WFFsobtained through combinations of other WFFs require simplification forefficient computation during trade studies. In this regard, leavingcombinations of WFFs in an un-simplified state may result in explodingmemory size as the WFFs are further combined in relatively largenetworks involving thousands of equations. Furthermore, when a WFFsimplifies to a universally false WFF, the computational plan generationprocedure can prune unneeded branches of a constraint network 100 andthereby produce compact and efficient computational plans 102.

Such WFF simplification process may be extremely computationallyintensive when applied to logic formulas having a large quantity ofpredicates over finite but large domains. Classical algorithms fordetermining the conjunctive normal forms of a WFF or the disjunctivenormal forms of a WFF are inadequate to provide the system designer withcomputational results in a relatively short period of time (e.g.,several minutes). The simplification of WFFs is preferably performed asrapidly as possible in order to reduce computational time and increasethe amount of time available to a system designer to consider andinvestigate different design trades. A reduction in the amount of timefor simplifying well-formed formulas may additionally provide a systemdesigner with the capability to investigate larger and more complexdesign spaces.

For example, in the conceptual design of a hypersonic vehicle, aconstraint management planning algorithm is required to simplify manyWFFs containing numerous references to a large quantity of predicatesduring the planning of one of many desired trade studies. An example WFFmay have only 10 to 15 predicates with each predicate having two to 20possible values. Such WFFs may syntactically refer to the samepredicates 5 to 10 times with a depth on a similar scale (e.g.,And(Or(And Or(P1=−p11, P2=p21 . . . ) . . . Or(And(P1=p13,Or(Not(P1=p13) . . . )))) etc. Unfortunately, the simplification of suchWFFs to a conjunctive normal form or a disjunctive normal form usingclassical algorithms requires 10 to 30 minutes of computer time in oneimplementation. The relatively long period of computer time forsimplifying WFFs using classical algorithms directly detracts from thetime available to a designer for considering and investigating largerand more complex design trades.

Advantageously, the simplification of well-formed formulas (WFFs) maysupport computational planning in a data-dependent constraint network asdisclosed herein and illustrated in FIGS. 9A-20B. The process ofsimplifying WFFs may include converting an input WFF (not shown) into aninitial bit array (not shown), simplifying the initial bit array into asimplified bit array (not shown) by removing predicates that are notnecessary to represent the input WFF, and then converting the simplifiedbit array into a return WFF (not shown).

A bit array may be defined as an array having bit elements (not shown)that have a value of either “1” or “0”. In addition, a bit array mayinclude any number of dimensions. Each dimension can have a differentsize. For boolean predicates (not shown), the size of the correspondingbit array dimension is 2. For equality predicates (not shown), the sizeof the bit array dimension equals the length of the domain. A logic bitarray may be defined as a bit array including a mapping of eachdimension of the bit array to a list of the predicates (e.g., booleanand/or equality) included in the bit array.

An input WFF (not shown) may include atomic true or atomic false WFFs,atomic boolean predicate WFFs, atomic equality predicate WFFs, negationWFFs involving the negation operator (NOT), and compound WFFs involvingthe conjunction and disjunction operators AND or OR. The simplificationof an input WFF may include determining the predicates in the input WFF,determining the domain elements associated with each one of thepredicates, determining the bit array dimensions of the initial bitarray, and recursively processing the input WFF by calling an internalprogram (not shown) and returning an initial bit array having the bitarray dimensions, the predicates, and the domain elements associatedwith the input WFF.

For cases where the input WFF is an atomic WFF comprising a singleboolean predicate, the single boolean predicate may be converted to anequality predicate. For cases where the input WFF is a compound WFFcomprising zero or more of the atomic WFFs or a plurality of compoundWFFs associated with either a disjunction operator (OR) or a conjunctionoperator (AND), or, exactly one atomic WFF or a compound WFF associatedwith a negation operator, each operand of the compound WFF may berecursively processed until atomic WFFs are encountered. The recursivelyprocessed WFFs may be combined according to whether the operator of thecompound WFF is a negation operator (NOT), a conjunction operator (AND),or a disjunction operator (OR). An initial bit array is then returnedfor each one of the atomic WFFs.

For non-negated compound WFF cases where the operator is a conjunctionoperator (e.g., AND) or a disjunction operator (e.g., OR), the quantityof operands in the combined initial bit arrays may be determined. For aconjunction operator, the bit elements of the individual initial bitarrays may be combined in a manner such that the bit elements are equalto the conjunction (the “AND”) of the individual initial bit arrays. Fora disjunction operator, the bit elements of the individual initial bitarrays may be combined in a manner such that the bit elements are equalto the disjunction (the “OR”) of the individual initial bit arrays. Aninitial bit array may include a plurality of bit array dimensionsassociated with the predicates.

An initial bit array may be simplified by removing predicates that arenot necessary to represent the input WFF. In this regarding, thesimplification of an initial bit array may generally comprise collapsingthe initial bit array by removing semantically redundant bit arraydimensions such as by comparing the bit elements of the sub-arrays foreach one of the bit array dimensions to determine if a bit arraydimension is collapsible. If the bit elements of the sub-arrays areequal, then the dimension associated with the sub-array can be removed.

A simplified bit array may be converted into a return WFF in disjunctivenormal form (DNF) or in conjunctive normal form (CNF) by systematicallyprocessing the simplified bit array given a set of predicates and theirrespective domain elements, and constructing a return WFF. Theconversion of a simplified bit array may comprise determining a totalquantity of the bit elements in the simplified bit array having a valueof 1, and converting the simplified bit array to a return WFF indisjunctive normal form (DNF) if less than one-half of the totalquantity of the bit elements has a value of 1. The simplified bit arraymay be converted to a return WFF in conjunctive normal form (CNF) 142 ifat least one-half of the total quantity of the bit elements has a valueof 1.

Advantageously, the simplification of well-formed formulas in adata-dependent constraint management system or constraint network mayresult in a significant reduction in the amount of time required tosimplify the results of the union, intersection, and differenceoperations of well-formed formulas which may significantly reduce theamount of time required for processing specific trade studies. Thereduction in processing time provides the technical effect of allowing adesigner to explore larger and more complex design spaces in anintegrated manner using the computational planning method disclosedherein for data-dependent constraint networks 100.

Referring to FIGS. 20A-20B, shown in FIG. 20B is a flow diagram havingone or more operations that may be included in the routine“Finalize(plan)”. The routine 214 is configured to reverse the order forthe plan steps that were pushed onto the plan step stack as describedabove. FIG. 20B illustrates a pseudo-code listing of the routine“Finalize” 204 illustrated in the flow diagram of FIG. 20A.

Referring to FIG. 21, shown is a block diagram of a system forimplementing the above-described computational planning method, in wholeor in part, in a computer-implemented process such as on aprocessor-based system 300 or other suitable computer system. Theprocessor-based system 300 may implement one or more of theabove-described computational planning steps for a data-dependentconstraint network 100 (FIG. 8). The processor-based system 300 mayperform computer readable program instructions 324 which may be providedto or loaded onto the processor-based system 300 in order to implementone or more of the above-described operations or steps. In anon-limiting example, the processor-based system 300 and/or the computerreadable program instructions 324 may facilitate the definition of thecomputational plan 102 for a data-dependent constraint network 100.

The block diagram of FIG. 21 illustrates the processor-based system 300in an advantageous embodiment that may facilitate the determining of acomputational plan 102 (FIG. 8) in a bipartite graph 106 (FIG. 8)representing the constraint network 100. The processor-based system 300may determine a world set 140 (FIG. 7) in which a status of the variablenodes 120 (FIG. 8) is determined, and determine the computational plan102 from one or more input 126 variable nodes 120 (FIG. 8) to one ormore output 128 variable nodes 120 (FIG. 8) during a backward chainingsearch of the bipartite graph 106. In the embodiment illustrated in FIG.21, the processor-based system 300 may include a data communication path302 (e.g., data link) communicatively coupled to one or more componentblocks to facilitate transfer of data between such component blocks. Thecommunication path 302 may comprise one or more data buses or any othersuitable communication path 302 that facilitates the transfer of databetween the component blocks and devices of the processor-based system300.

Referring to FIG. 21, in a non-limiting embodiment, the component blocksmay include one or more of a processor 304, a memory device 306, anon-volatile storage device 308, a communications device 312, aninput/output device 310, and a display device 314. The system mayfurther include a variable node specifier 326, a world set specifier328, and a plan determiner 330. As indicated above, the variable nodespecifier 326 may be configured to facilitate the specifying of one ormore variable nodes 120 as inputs 126 representing a starting point forthe plan 102, and one or more variable nodes 120 as outputs 128 to becomputed by the plan 102. The world set specifier 328 may be configuredto facilitate the specifying of a world set 140 in which thecomputational plan 102 is desired. If inputs 126 (e.g., input variablenodes 120) are not specified, the plan determiner 330 may be configuredto determine the plan 102 from all of the inputs 126 in the constraintnetwork 100 influencing a value of the outputs 128. If a world set 140is not specified, the plan determiner 330 may be configured to determinea world set 140 in which a status of the variable nodes 120 is in adetermined state.

The plan determiner 330 may be configured to determine the plan 102 fromthe input(s) 126 to the output(s) 128 during a search of the bipartitegraph 106. Upon determining the plan 102, the plan determiner 330 may beconfigured to provide the plan as an input list 220 or queue, an outputlist 218 or queue, a stub queue 234, and a plan queue 236 as describedabove. If the input variables 126 are specified as arguments, the plandeterminer 330 may be configured to update the world set 140 associatedwith a specified input variable 126 by unioning the evolving world setderived on a search path with the world set 140 associated with thatinput variable. During the backward chaining search of the bipartitegraph, the plan determiner 330 may be configured to start with an output128 variable node 120 and update the output list 218 by adding theoutput 128 variable node 120 and a specified world set 140 to the outputlist 218 if the output 128 variable node 120 is in a determined statefor the entirety of the specified world set 140.

During the backward chaining search, the plan determiner 330 mayadditionally be configured to update the plan 102 while following eachone of the incoming arcs 110 backwards along a search path byrecursively performing the following operations for a given world set:finding the plan for a variable node 120, finding the plan for acomponent 132, finding the plan for a relation node, and finding theplan for an arc, the world sets 140 that enable the incoming arcs 110associated with a given variable node 120 being disjoint. In addition,the plan determiner 330 may be configured to maintain, while updatingthe plan 102, an appropriate world set 140 along the search path as anintersection of an evolving world set 140 with enabling world sets 140of additional elements in the search path, wherein the additionalelements comprise variable nodes 120, components 132, relation nodes114, and arcs 110. Furthermore, the plan determiner 330 may beconfigured to find, for each incoming arc 110, a plan for a component132 if the incoming arc 110 is part of a component 132 or, a plan for arelation node 114 if the incoming arc 110 is not part of a component132.

In FIG. 21, the plan determiner 330 may additionally be configured tofind a plan for all arcs 110 of component 132 predecessors, find a planfor all incoming arcs 110 of the relation nodes 114, and remove adependence of the world set 140 on a state variable 124, wherein thestate variable 124 may comprise a boolean variable or, a categoricalvariable having discrete values over a finite domain. During thebackward chaining search, the plan determiner 330 may be configured toupdate the plan queue 236 by adding the arcs 110 or components 132 andassociated world sets 140 in a reverse order of the search path uponreaching a specified input variable node 120, or upon reaching anindependent input variable node 120 if a specified input variable node120 is not provided. Furthermore, the plan determiner 330 may beconfigured to initially note or determine whether any search pathstarting with a predecessor arc 110 of a plan step ends at a specifiedinput 126 variable node 120 and, if so, update the stub queue 234 with astub variable and an associated stub world set 140. The stub variablecomprises the variable associated with any other predecessor arc 110whose search paths do not terminate at any of the specified input 126variables. The stub world set comprises the union of the world sets 140of those search paths. Upon determining the plan 102, the plandeterminer 330 may be configured to finalize the plan 102 by reversingan order of plan steps.

Referring still to FIG. 21, the results of any one of theabove-described steps of specifying inputs 126 and outputs 128 for thecomputational plan 102, specifying a world set 140 in which a status ofthe variable nodes 120 is determined, and performing the backwardchaining search of the bipartite graph 106, may be transmitted to theinput/output device 310. The input/output device 310 may becommunicatively coupled to the display device 314 which may beconfigured to display the results of the computational planning. Thedisplay device 314 may be configured to display the progress and/orresults of an implementation of the computational planning. In addition,the display device 314 may be configured to display the results of atrade study implemented in a data-dependent constraint management system(FIG. 8) using the computational planning process.

In an embodiment, the processor-based system 300 may include one or moreof the processors 304 for executing instructions of computer readableprogram instructions 324 that may be installed into the memory device306. Alternatively, the processor 304 may comprise a multi-processorcore having two or more integrated processors cores. Even further, theprocessor 304 may comprise a main processor and one or more secondaryprocessors integrated on a chip. The processor 304 may also comprise amany-processor system having a plurality of similarly configuredprocessors.

Referring still to FIG. 21, the processor-based system 300 may furtherinclude one or more memory devices 306 which may comprise one or more ofvolatile or non-volatile storage devices 308. However, the memory device306 may comprise any hardware device, without limitation. For example,the memory device 306 may comprise a random access memory or a cache ofan interface and/or integrated memory controller hub which may beincluded in the communication path. The memory device 306 may beconfigured to permanently and/or temporarily store any one of a varietyof different types of data, computer readable code or programinstructions, or any other type of information. The non-volatile storagedevice 308 may be provided in a variety of configurations including, butnot limited to, a flash memory device, a hard drive, an optical disk, ahard disk, a magnetic tape or any other suitable embodiment forlong-term storage. In addition, the non-volatile storage device 308 maycomprise a removable device such as a removable hard drive.

The processor-based system 300 may additionally include one or more ofthe input/output devices 310 to facilitate the transfer of data betweencomponents 132 that may be connected to the processor-based system 300.The input/output device 310 may be directly and/or indirectly coupled tothe processor-based system 300. The input/output device 310 mayfacilitate user-input by means of a peripheral device such as akeyboard, a mouse, a joystick, a touch screen and any other suitabledevice for inputting data to the processor-based system 300. Theinput/output device 310 may further include an output device fortransferring data representative of the output of the processor-basedsystem 300. For example the input/output device 310 may comprise adisplay device 314 such as a computer monitor or computer screen fordisplaying results of data processed by the processor-based system 300.The input/output device 310 may optionally include a printer or faxmachine for printing a hardcopy of information processed by theprocessor-based system 300.

Referring still to FIG. 21, the processor-based system 300 may includeone or more communications devices 312 to facilitate communication ofthe processor-based system 300 within a computer network and/or withother processor-based systems. Communication of the processor-basedsystem 300 with a computer network or with other processor-based systemsmay be by wireless means and/or by hardwire connection. For example, thecommunications device 312 may comprise a network interface controller toenable wireless or cable communication between the processor-basedsystem 300 and a computer network. The communications device 312 mayalso comprise a modem and/or a network adapter or any one of a varietyof alternative device for transmitting and receiving data.

One or more of the operations of the methodology described above forcomputational planning in a data-dependent constraint network 100 may beperformed by the processor 304 and/or by one or more of the variablenode specifier 326, the world set specifier 328, and the plan determiner330 using the computer readable program instructions 324. The computerreadable program instructions 324 may comprise program code which mayinclude computer usable program code and computer readable program code.The computer readable program instructions 324 may be read and executedby the processor 304. The computer readable program instructions 324 mayenable the processor 304 to perform one or more operations of theabove-described embodiments associated with computational planning in aconstraint network 100.

Referring still to FIG. 21, the computer readable program instructions324 may include operating instructions for the processor-based system300 and may further include applications and programs. The computerreadable program instructions 324 may be contained and/or loaded ontoone or more of memory devices 306 and/or non-volatile storage devices308 for execution by the formula processor 304, the formula converter,the bit array simplifier, the bit array converter, and/or the bit arrayconstructor. As indicated above, one or more of the memory devices 306and/or non-volatile storage devices 308 may be communicatively coupledto one or more of the remaining component blocks illustrated in FIG. 21through the communication path.

The computer readable program instructions 324 may be contained ontangible or non-tangible, transitory or non-transitory computer readablemedia 318 and which may be loaded onto or transferred to theprocessor-based system 300 for execution by the processor. The computerreadable program instructions 324 and the computer readable media 318comprise a computer program product 316. In an embodiment, the computerreadable media 318 may comprise computer readable storage media 320and/or computer readable signal media 322.

The computer readable storage media 320 may comprise a variety ofdifferent embodiments including, but not limited to, optical disks andmagnetic disks that may be loaded into a drive, a flash memory device orother storage device or hardware for transfer of data onto a storagedevice such as a hard drive. The computer readable storage media 320 maybe non-removably installed on the processor-based system 300. Thecomputer readable storage media 320 may comprise any suitable storagemedia and may include, without limitation, a semiconductor system or apropagation medium. In this regard, the computer readable storage media320 may comprise electronic media, magnetic media, optical media,electromagnetic media, and infrared media. For example, the computerreadable storage media 320 may comprise magnetic tape, a computerdiskette, random access memory and read-only memory. Non-limitingexamples of embodiments of optical disks may include compact disks—readonly memory, compact disks—read/write, and digital video disks.

The computer readable signal media 322 may contain the computer readableprogram instructions 324 and may be embodied in a variety of data signalconfigurations including, but not limited to, an electromagnetic signaland an optical signal. Such data signals may be transmitted by anysuitable communications link including by wireless or hardwire means.For example, the hardwire means may comprise an optical fiber cable, acoaxial cable, a signal wire and any other suitable means fortransmitting the data by wireless or by physical means.

Referring still to FIG. 21, the computer readable signal media 322 mayfacilitate the downloading of the computer readable program instructions324 to the non-volatile storage or other suitable storage or memorydevice 306 for use within processor-based system 300. For example, thecomputer readable program instructions 324 contained within the computerreadable storage media 320 may be downloaded to the processor-basedsystem 300 over a computer network from a server or client computer ofanother system.

Any one of a variety of different embodiments of the processor-basedsystem 300 may be implemented using any hardware device or systemcapable of executing the computer readable program instructions 324. Forexample, the processor 304 may comprise a hardware unit configured forperforming one or more particular functions wherein the computerreadable program instructions 324 for performing the functions may bepre-loaded into the memory device 306.

In an embodiment, the processor 304 may comprise an application specificintegrated circuit (ASIC), a programmable logic device, or any otherhardware device configured to perform one or more specific functions oroperations. For example, a programmable logic device may be temporarilyor permanently programmed to perform one or more of the operationsrelated to the computational planning in a constraint network 100. Theprogrammable logic device may comprise a programmable logic array,programmable array logic, a field programmable logic array, and a fieldprogrammable gate array and any other suitable logic device, withoutlimitation. In an embodiment, the computer readable program instructions324 may be operated by the one or more processors and/or by otherdevices including one or more hardware units in communication with theprocessor 304. Certain portions of the computer readable programinstructions 324 may be run be the processor 304 and other portions ofthe computer readable program instructions 324 may be run by thehardware units.

Advantageously, the system and method disclosed herein for creating aconditional computational plan 102 for a data-dependent constraintnetwork 100 avoids the intermixing of planning and computation as isrequired by traditional conditional planning algorithms. In this regard,the computational planning system and method disclosed herein providethe technical effect of facilitating the performance of trade studiesover a significantly broader range of trade spaces during front-endtrade studies or during conceptual design of complex engineering systemsrelative to a limited range of trade spaces provided by traditionalconditional planning methods. A further technical effect provided by thecomputational planning method disclosed herein is a significant increasein the efficiency with which trade studies may be conducted across aheterogeneous trade space wherein a system configuration or vehicleconfiguration (e.g., a configuration of an air vehicle or a launchvehicle) may change significantly across the trade space and, therefore,the equations describing vehicle cost, vehicle performance, and otherparameters, may have significantly different parametric forms. Inaddition to significantly increasing the rapidity with which a designermay explore a broad range of trade spaces, the computational planningsystem and method disclosed herein provides the technical effect offacilitating a significant increase in the completeness with which agiven trade space may be explored within a given time period.

Many modifications and other embodiments of the disclosure will come tomind to one skilled in the art to which this disclosure pertains havingthe benefit of the teachings presented in the foregoing descriptions andthe associated drawings. The embodiments described herein are meant tobe illustrative and are not intended to be limiting or exhaustive.Although specific terms are employed herein, they are used in a genericand descriptive sense only and not for purposes of limitation.

1.-26. (canceled)
 27. A method substantially as shown and described. 